Ciri becoming a Witcher has some logical inconsistencies within the established lore of The Witcher series.

Witcher Trials are Extremely Dangerous: The trials that turn humans into Witchers involve mutagens that are lethal to most, even those with exceptional resistance. Ciri, while exceptionally gifted, would not have been able to survive the Witcher mutations. Unlike Geralt, who has a strong constitution and survived the trials at a young age, Ciri’s body is not shown to be more resistant than the average person’s, making it unlikely that she could survive this transformation.

The Witcher Mutation Process: The mutations that define a Witcher involve the alteration of a person's genetic makeup to enhance their abilities, such as improved strength, senses, and longevity. These trials are specifically designed for young boys who undergo physical and mental conditioning, which is why the mutations are more likely to take hold in them. Ciri, being a girl, doesn't fit the traditional profile, and while she has unique powers due to her Elder Blood, this doesn’t automatically make her a viable candidate for the Witcher mutations.

Her Elder Blood: While Ciri’s Elder Blood does grant her special abilities, including the power to traverse worlds and manipulate time, this doesn’t automatically grant her the resilience needed for the Witcher trials. The powers she inherits don’t seem to align with the typical traits that would make one suitable for becoming a Witcher. This raises the question of why the mutation would work in her case when it has not worked for others outside of the typical Witcher candidates.

Role in the Story: From a narrative standpoint, making Ciri a Witcher could feel forced, as it might dilute the concept of the Witcher trials and their unique, grueling nature. Witchers are supposed to be rare, exceptional individuals who have undergone a harsh and almost fatal process. If anyone could become a Witcher, it would diminish the importance of the trials, and Ciri’s role as a singular individual with Elder Blood could be undermined.

While Ciri is undoubtedly a powerful character, her becoming a Witcher doesn’t align well with the established lore about the mutations and trials that define them.

The trailer looked phenomenal to me.
Character creation isn't innovative at all, so what's your point? A million other games do that. If you care about it so much, why not play another RPG with character creation, and let The Witcher be The Witcher?

What I want to see is The Witcher 1 Triss in full current gen glory in the Remake. :D

Oh sure, because every game should be the same, right? Why bother with world-building or the importance of lore? Ciri becoming a Witcher is totally logical, and who cares if it undermines the very essence of what it means to be a Witcher? Let’s just make everyone a Witcher, and throw the deep, dark implications of the trials out the window. It’s not like that’s what made the Witcher so fascinating in the first place!

Do we really need two threads for this? Or is it three already?

Anyway, I like I already said, I wish this was set in a different time period, distanced from Geralt's (and Ciri's) story. That story is over, it reached a satisfying conclusion. But if they had to continue it, Ciri honestly is the logical replacement for Geralt, and I think it's better than dragging him out for yet another adventure. Although apparently he will appear in the game too, so I guess he can get no true final ending either.

I'm open to seeing how they explain Ciri becoming a full Witcher, I won't judge that until I see it. It doesn't bother me too much right now, because entirely regardless of her undergoing the trials or not, simply justifying continuing hers and Geralt's story would still need to be justified with hell of good writing. But it's good to keep in mind the games were always, from the start, non-canon sequels to a story the author considers concluded. So Witcher IV is to the previous games kind of exactly what those games were to the books. Simply seeing Geralt alive and back at Kaer Morhen in the first game was just as much if not far more "wrong" than anything we've seen in the new trailer. So it's kind of silly to be a fan of the previous games, but outraged at this new one, at least until we see more.

There is a similar thread where I posted this:

I am admittedly disappointed in the direction of this game. I was hopeful Witcher IV would be a new and fresh start to the series. With Witcher 3, without spoiling anything, wrapped up the storyline for all characters rather well, and not all possible endings translate to the Witcher 4 trailer.

So why continue from Witcher 3? It ended. And did so in amazing fashion.

Why not start brand new and let the user select their character? Have the user go through the Trial of the Grrasses, have the user resurrect or recruit for Kaer Morhen, anything but playing a character, any character from Witcher 3. Why go back to what already determined, ended, and left users quite satisfied with the game?

Forcing users into a Witcher 3 character, at least to me, makes no sense.

Witcher 3 ended. I know what happened to the characters. So I do not see myself playing Witcher 4, as it currently is.

Trailers for CP2077 varied from the final release, so hopefully CDPR will make some changes, and allow users to build the character they desire, and start new, instead of looking in the rearview mirror.

Link: https://www.gog.com/forum/general/the_witcher_iv/page6

The books have open ending. We can only guess, what has exactly happened. Therefore, Geralt's return to Kaer Morhen does not feel unnatural.

The backstory in the Witcher 2, however, is forced and underdeveloped. Instead of fixing the plot hole, those flashbacks only make it worse.

As for the trailer in question, the Witcher setting has particular rules, which are neglected. Ciri was meant to become sorceress, but sacrificed her ability to use any magic ( even as simple, as Witcher signs ) for a higher cause. That has been explained in books in detail.

In previous games developers only altered the established story. In the Witcher 4 they tamper with fundamental principles of the universe.

And for what purpose? To make exactly the same gameplay and character development ( as if we are still playing Geralt ), instead of creating something new and interesting for another character class.

It will not run on my PC , so i don't really care . :p

Not at all, looks lovely, no cartoons:)

Not gonna lie, what I want to see is her original design with the more mature witch look she had on 1, before they gave her that young design for 2 (in my personal theory, to make Yen more likeable and relatable to Geralt on 3, as they are more "experienced" - to be fair though, Yen is his pair and will always be, as Geralt on 1 was on amnesia status anyway.)

Beautifully explained.
But Im sure they're hearing fans feedback already.

Also, just want to highlight another good comment:

Would like to add that the game will have huge sales anyway, so even if something weird is happening with Ciri character right now behind the scenes (which probably is) will not make much of a difference for this game.

It sure as hell did to me initially.

You really don't think providing an unambigious "and then this happened" to the author's intended open ending is messing with a fundamental part of the books just because on a technicality it doesn't mess with the "lore"? I swear, people these day obsess about lore over everything else as if books were just their wikipedia entries.

I love The Wticher 1 & 3. The first one might just be my favorite RPG of all time. But I still can only enjoy it as a "maybeee..." kind of thing.

Look, I'm not even defending anything specific here, all I'm saying is that we've only seen a short trailer that doesn't explain anything yet, so maybe we could just wait and see where they are going with this? Because right now it's a bit like seeing a Klingon in a Starfleet uniform in a Star Trek TNG trailer in 1987 and flipping the table. The most important thing for me is that the trailer felt in keeping with the established style and themes (unlike, say, the infamous Veilguard trailer).

Just yesterday I watched the trailer, and I liked it a lot. First of all, I don’t mind having Ciri-Witcher as the main character (shouldn’t Geralt so rightfully retire after all?). [Some spoilers about Witcher 3 now. For anyone (if any) who hasn’t played it yet] I also liked that they used this W3’s ending as the default, with Ciri becoming a witcher after Geralt (I had that ending too), instead of the Empress Ciri.

I think I will need to buy a new PC in the following years!

I don't care if they deviate from the books in regards to Ciri. If making Ciri the main character means more "normies" will buy the game and therefore give them a bigger budget to make a better game, I'm all for it.
The trailer felt very much like a Witcher game and that's all I care about.

I would prefer to play a new witcher in the first game, as was initially intended. However, Geralt's established relationships with other characters and numerous references to the previous events ( books ) greatly contributed to the player experience. And in-game version of Geralt is faithfully recreated.

As I've already posted, I would like to see new entries to the Witcher series set in different time, and introducing different characters.

If CDPR decided to stick with Ciri, they could at least make her true to the books, as they did with Geralt. However, the trailer proves otherwise.